Liesbeth CLAES♣*

THE CONSECRATIO COINS FOR – A RECONSIDERATION

Abstract – ﬈is article proposes a review of the consecratio coins for Commodus issued shortly a﬇er this emperor’s death. Most standard numismatic catalogues list these coins as being of doubtﬔl authenticity. However, a typological and stylistic analysis of the several assembled specimens of the type suggests that it was issued by an eastern mint, most likely Alexandria. Furthermore, the die axis and the message content of the specimens suggest that the coins were issued in 195 ad, indicating that the emission of the coins was related to the retrospective adoption of into the Antonine House.

he consecratio coins for commodus are often used by modern scholars as authoritative source material, mainly in the discussion of [1] T Commodus’ renovatio memoriae during the reign of Septimius Severus. Indeed, generally, these coins are attributed to the mint of and dated to 195 ad, the year in which Commodus received the honour of deification from the Senate and in which Septimius Severus was retrospectively adopted into [2] the gens. ﬈ree different consecratio varieties are recorded in the ______

* Radboud University Nijmegen. E: [email protected] My gratitude goes out to Dr. Richard Abdy (British Museum), Prof.Dr. Johan van Heesch (Coin Cabinet of the Royal Library of Belgium), Prof. Dr. Olivier Hekster (Radboud Uni- versity Nijmegen) and Prof. Dr. Fleur Kemmers (Goethe Universität Frankﬔrt am Main), who kindly read through earlier versions of this article. ﬈eir comments have greatly im- proved the original dra﬇. ﬈anks also to Dr. Curtis Clay (Harlan J. Berk, Ltd.), Mr. Doug Smith and Mr. Rainer Blaeser for sharing their ideas about the Severan eastern coinages, and for explaining the unpublished theories of Bickford-Smith. For the article’s final form and for its remaining blemishes, I am responsible. [1] Hasebroek 1921, p. 90-91; Baharal 1996, p. 21; Turcan 1998, col. 1004-1005; Hek- ster 2002, p. 189-191; Lichtenberger 2011, p. 321-322, esp. note 14. Not all scholars refer to the consecratio types for Commodus : Kaiser-Raiss 1980; Rubin 1980, p. 212-214; Szaivert 1989; Birley 1999, pp. 184-188 and 198-199; von Saldern 2003; Rowan 2012, p. 46-48. [2] Dio 76.7.4; ha, Vita Severi 10.6, 11.4; Aurelius , Liber de Caesaribus 20.30; bmc re v, p. xci; ae 1951 75 = cil viii 27374; cil viii 1333, 5699, 5700, 9317, 23707; ils 420, 422, 431; irt 389, 393; Hekster 2002, p. 189-191; Kienast 2004, p. 148. rbn clviii (2012), p. 207-224. 208 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

standard numismatic catalogues, such as Description historique des monnaies frappées sous l’Empire romain (Cohen), Roman Imperial Coinage (ric), Coins of the in the British Museum (bmcre) and the Roman Imperial [3] Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet (hcc). All these posthumous coins, how- [4] ever, are noted to be of doubtﬔl authenticity. To this day, it is not clear when and where these three varieties were issued, and there are many doubts con- cerning whether the types are genuine. In the past fi﬇een years, several posthumous specimens for Commodus have turned up at reliable numismatic web-auctions, and in 2005 one was even [5] donated to the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge. A﬇er checking several coin museum collections, renowned numismatic databases and auction catalo- [6] gues, I was able to assemble 16 silver specimens for Commodus. All 16 silver specimens depict a laureate Commodus with the legend IM COMM ANTON AV G P I V S R B I T (sic), and their reverses display an eagle on a globe with the legend CONSECRATIO. ﬈ough additional specimens may well exist, some conclusions can already be drawn from this set. ﬈rough this newly assembled material, then, this article aims to analyse the consecratio types for Commodus in order to determine whether the types are genuine, and if so, which mint issued them and when. ﬈ese answers would be very helpﬔl with a view to sub- sequent coin studies in general, and for scholars who work on Commodus, his deification, and Septimius Severus’ role in it, in particular. As mentioned above, the standard catalogues Cohen, ric, bmcre and hcc listed three varieties of consecratio types for Commodus: 1. A silver type displaying Commodus’ laureate portrait with an eagle stand- ing on a globe on the reverse. Based on the highly unreadable types conserved in the British Museum in London and the Hunter Coin Cabinet in Glasgow, the catalogues noted for the obverse legend M COMM ANTON AVG PIVS

______[3] Pink 1933, p. 17-54, does not mention the consecratio coins for Commodus in his analy- sis of the Severan coins. [4] Cohen, Commodus 2, 61; ric iii Commodus 263a,b; ric iv.a Septimius Severus 72a, 736a; bmcre v, 42, 143; Robertson, hcc ii, Commodus 69. In Hill 1964, the debate around the consecratio types for Commodus is omitted. [5] Ancient Auction House, Florida; Apollo Numismatics; beastcoins.com; Bruun Rasmus- sen Kunstauktioner; Classical Numismatic Group; Forum Ancient Coins; Fritz Rudolf Künker GmbH & Co; Gorny & Mosch; Numismatica Ars Classica; wildwinds.com. Henri Delger donated on 17/iii/2005 a consecratio type for Commodus (cm.205-2005) to the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge. Two specimens are known to me from the pri- vate collections of Mr. Rainer Blaeser and Mr. Doug Smith. Most likely, the publication of the article of Bickford-Smith in rin 1994/95, p. 53-71, mentioning and dating the con- secratio type for Commodus, could have triggered trade to sell these types as genuine. [6] A list of these coin museum collections and numismatic databases is provided at the end of the article. liesbeth claes 209

[7] BRIT and for the reverse legend CONSECRATIO. ﬈e other 14 assembled specimens correspond to this description, and they provide the evidence to state with confidence that the obverse legend ought to be read as IM COMM ANTON AVG PIVS RBIT. (sic) 2. A silver type exactly as type 1, only Commodus’ nomenclature reads M [8] COMM ANTO AVG PIVS FEL. A specimen is listed as being in the Biblio- thèque nationale de France in Paris. However, following inquiry, only a speci- men of type 1 was found there, which suggests that type 2 was ‘created’ by misreading the obverse legend of type 1, and subsequently found its way into [9] the standard numismatic catalogues. 3. A sestertius depicting a laureate Commodus with the legend M COMMOD ANT P FELIX AVG BRIT P P. On the reverse, a female figure (Vesta?) is standing le﬇ by a lighted altar, holding a patera and a sceptre, with the legend CONSECRATIO SC. ﬈e sestertius was recorded in the now lost collection of [10] count Wiczay of Hungary. Although samples of this variety can still be found, it is highly unlikely that the type was genuine, because it seems to be an ancient hybrid of a Roman Commodus obverse with a Roman consecratio [11] reverse of Faustina the Elder. Summarizing : all 16 specimens assembled from trade and museums, in- cluding the British Museum and the Hunter Coin Collection, are of type 1, depicting a laureate Commodus with the nomenclature IM COMM ANTON AV G P I V S R B I T and a consecration eagle. ﬈e other types are therefore very unlikely to have existed as proper types in Antiquity. Of course, that does not mean that the type 1 specimens themselves are genuine. In order to clarify that point, the next section focuses on the assembled specimens of type 1, in order to know when and where these specimens were issued. Analysis shows that the 16 assembled specimens of type 1 were struck with 3 different obverse dies and 7 different reverse dies, which suggests that the ______[7] ric iii Commodus 263a = ric iv Septimius Severus 72a = bmcre v, 42 = Robertson, hcc ii, Commodus 69. ﬈e inventory numbers of the specimens are for the British Museum: 756, Coins & Medals bnk r.618 and for the Hunter Coin Cabinet of the University of Glasgow 28 002. [8] Cohen, Commodus 61 = ric iii Commodus 263b. [9] ﬈e inventory number for the Bibliothèque nationale de France is fg 5944. [10] Cohen, Commodus 2 = ric iv Septimius Severus 736a = bmcre v, 143. Count Wiczay of Hungary had an enormous ancient coin collection, which he, together with F. Caronni, published in two volumes : Musei Hedervarii numos antiquos graecos et latinos descripsit, Wien 1814. A﬇er Wiczay’s death in 1825, the coin dealer Rollin from Paris bought his entire collection, c.1830. Later, however, the collection was divided. Some coins were bought by the coin museums in Vienna and Paris, but the bulk of Wiczay’s collection entered trade and passed to many other private collections. Dr. Curtis Clay on https//: www.forumancientcoins.com/wiczay [last checked on 28/xi/2011]. [11] ric iii 1130. Dr. Curtis Clay was so kind as to point this out to me. 210 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

[12] issue’s output was substantial. Moreover, the number of different dies involved shows that the type was no accidental hybrid made during one day’s work session. Unfortunately we do not possess information on the technical details of all assembled specimens, but those for which we do always show a die axis of 6 o’clock (Ò), suggesting that they were struck in one emission. ﬈e diameter of the 16 specimens varies from 16 to 19 mm, and is on average 18 mm. Most specimens have a mass between 2.49 and 2.79 g, which indicates that the individual specimens differ significantly from each other. ﬈ere is, more- over, one specimen that is much lighter, with a mass of 2.16 g, and there are [13] three that are heavier, with masses of 3.013, 3.03 g and 3.18 g. Of course, wear and corrosion over time could explain these variations in mass. As a further point, the general condition of the specimens is quite poor. ﬈e surface of the flans has suffered from porosity, and the metal seems to be of low quality. And finally, several pronounced stylistic features can be noticed. First of all, the obverse portrait is elongated, and Commodus’ neck widens out at the base and has a pronounced indentation. Second, the eyes of the emperor are protuberant and he has a thick upper lip with a moustache. ﬈irdly, the eagles on the reverses are stretched too. Lastly, the obverse legends generally have one break at the top of the emperor’s head, whereas the reverse legends have several regular substantial breaks. ﬈e lettering is quite regular, although an error occurred with the B and the R in the obverse legend. ﬈e variations in mass, the poor quality of the metal, the stylistic elongated figures with defined features and, in particular, the erroneous spelling all hint [14] at a type that did not originate from the Roman mint. In the eastern Roman provinces, the minting of imperial coins in the later second century was spo- radic. In the civil war of ad 193-195, random provincial mints struck imperial gold and silver issues, mostly to pay the stationed troops of the imperial usur- per who operated in that region, or to maintain the administrative structure in [15] the provinces. Moreover, the distribution of imperial precious metal issues in the eastern provinces advertised the supremacy of the issuing authority, [16] which at that time was an object of contention among several usurpers. At

______[12] Plates of the specimens are included at the end of the article. [13] Unfortunately I was not able to discover the mass of all specimens as not every numis- matic auction database recorded this information. In appendix 4 a plot chart with the known masses is given. [14] For the characteristics of the Roman mint during the late second century, see ric iv.a, p. 56; Hill 1964; Kaiser-Raiss 1980, p. 68-69; Carson 1990, p. 247-250; Szaivert 1989, pp. 77-84 and 87-88. [15] Milne 1938, p. 96-98; Crawford 1975, p. 562-565; Christiansen 1988, p. 296-297; Alston 1994, p. 113-123, esp. p. 114-115; van Heesch 2000, p. 36-37; Katsari 2003, p. 29-30. [16] Crawford 1975, p. 563-564; Metcalf 1982, p. 322-336; Katsari 2003, p. 33. liesbeth claes 211

the end of the second century, the following eastern mints seem to have issued imperial denarii and aurei on a temporary basis: Alexandria, , Caesarea (in Cappadocia), and two Syrian mints generally identified as ‘Emesa’ and [17] ‘Laodicea ad Mare’. As it happens, the variable mass, the poor metal quality and the heavy and distinctive style of the discussed consecratio coins is typical of the provincial emissions of the Alexandrian mint, as was already described by the numisma- [18] tist Laffranchi in the 1920s , and not of that of any other contemporary mint. ﬈e three arguments together thus appear to favour the Alexandrian mint as [19] the best candidate for having issued the consecratio coins for Commodus. Beside these comparative arguments, there are other clues that hint at Alexan- dria as an imperial mint during the late second century, issuing imperial aurei and denarii. Firstly, there is no doubt that the Alexandrian mint seems to have issued aurei and denarii for Pescennius Niger from the moment the latter seized power [20] in Egypt in 193 ad. ﬈ese types too displayed a heavy-featured portrait of Pescennius with protuberant eyes, a characteristic attributed to the Alexandrian [21] mint. Secondly, several denarii and aurei of Septimius Severus, his wife and his caesar Clodius Albinus have been attributed to the Alexandrian [22] mint. A﬇er Septimius Severus defeated Pescennius Niger in Egypt in Febru- ary 194 ad, the Alexandrian mint was taken over by Septimius Severus. Again, his emissions show similar stylistic characteristics, such as the protuberant ______[17] Mattingly 1932, p. 177-198; ric iv.a, p. 19, 56-59; bmcre v, pp. cxiv-cxxiv, clxi and ccxli; Hill 1964; van Heesch 1978, p. 58-71; Bland, Bendall & Burnett 1987, p. 65- 83; Christiansen 1988, p. 297; Carson 1990, p. 268-275; Bickford-Smith 1994/95, p. 53-71; van Heesch 2000, p. 36-37; Gitler & Ponting 2003; Butcher 2004; McAlee 2007. ﬈ere are scholars who suggested other eastern mints as well, such as , Nicomedia or Caesarea Germania (Bithynia), but their existence remains highly debat- able, see Mabbott 1946, p. 145-150 and H. Mattingly, bmcre v, p. cviii-cix. [18] Laffranchi 1921, p. 413-420. Cf. Mattingly 1932, p. 177-198; Christiansen 1988, pp. 296-297 and 301; Savio 1985, p. 137-143 y 1997. For an Alexandrian provincial specimen, see appendix 5. [19] Some scholars have argued against Alexandria as an imperial mint during the late second century: Pink 1933, p. 49-50 stated that the Alexandrian mint did not issue any imperial emission during the reign of Septimius Severus. Cf. Milne 1938, p. 96-98; van Heesch 1978, p. 58; Crawford 1975, p. 563-564. [20] van Heesch 1978, p. 58-71; Nelson 1982, p. 265-274; McAlee 2007, p. 260-261. [21] See appendix 6, fig. 25. Bland, Bendall & Burnett 1987, p. 70-73, pl. 10.6-11; bgu xiii 2285; PGrenf ii 60; POxy 719, 801. Cf. Dutilh 1898, p. 440-442. Cf. H. Mattingly, bmcre v, p. cvii-cviii, who connects an type of Pescennius with an Alexandrian emission of Septimius. [22] H. Mattingly, bmcre v, Septimius Severus nos. 319-334. In an appendix, Bland, Ben- dall & Burnett 1987, p. 65-83, attributed some aurei of Septimius Severus and his wife to the Alexandrian mint. Bickford-Smith 1994/95, p. 54-57. 212 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

eyes and the elongated figures with heavy features, which all argue in favour of [23] the mint of Alexandria. Moreover, it seems highly possible that the conse- cratio denarii for Commodus were issued during the period in which the Alex- [24] andrian mint produced Severan denarii from February 194 until 195 ad. ﬈e stylistic similarities between the consecratio type for Commodus and the pro- vincial Alexandrian tetradrachms, as well as the similar stylistic types of Pes- cennius Niger and Septimius Severus which are both attributed to the Alexan- drian mint, strongly argue in favour of the notion that the discussed consecra- [25] tio type was issued by the Alexandrian mint. As mentioned before, several eastern mints operated at the end of the second century under imperial auspices. Unfortunately, none of them issued coins bearing mint marks. In order to strengthen our attribution to the Alexandrian mint, the significant stylistic differences with the contemporary emissions of the mints of Antioch, Caesarea (in Cappadocia) and the Syrian [26] mints, identified as Emesa and Laodice ad Mare, will be outlined here. Unlike the Alexandrian elongated portraits, the Antiochene portraits are more rectangular in shape, and the obverse legend has no substantial break, or only [27] a very small one. ﬈e specimens from Caesarea in Cappadocia display rounder portraits that are slightly elongated, but have no necks with a pro- [28] nounced indentation. ﬈e Syrian mints issued coins with fine features and great detail, such as the narrow pointed and curly beard. ﬈e elegant style con- trasts with the heavy style of the Alexandrian mint. Emesa distinguishes itself by more round headed portraits, and o﬇en its legends have forced illogical breaks, such as the gap between the E and V of SEV(erus). O﬇en the legends show Greek forms of letters, such as " for E. ﬈e portraits on coins from Lao- dicea ad Mare were more elongated. Furthermore, the form of the obverse ______[23] For a specimen of Septimius Severus attributed to the mint of Alexandria, see appendix 6, fig. 28. [24] In his article, Bickford-Smith suggested the attribution of the consecratio type for Commodus to the Alexandrian mint. Unfortunately he omitted his customary stylistic arguments, because he was finishing a bigger study around Septimius’ Eastern mints, which was never published. None of the works of Bickford-Smith were published post- humously. [25] ric iv.a, p. 56-58; Bickford-Smith 1994/95, p. 57-62. [26] Specimens of these mints are shown in appendix 6, fig. 26, 27, 29 and 30. [27] Appendix 6, fig. 26; van Heesch 2000, p. 62-63; Bland, Bendall & Burnett 1987, p. 66-67 and plate 10·3-5; McAlee 2007, p. 260-261. Note : the likelihood that the ex- amined consecratio coins for Commodus are to be attributed to the mint of Antioch is small, because Antioch’s right to issue imperial coins was revoked by Septimius as pun- ishment for their support of Pescennius Niger. See McAlee 2007, p. 262 and Downey 1961, p. 239-241. [28] Appendix 6, fig. 27; van Heesch 2000, p. 62; Zedelius 1977; Bland, Bendall & Bur- nett 1987, p. 66-67 and plate 10·1-2. liesbeth claes 213

legends is parallel to that of the Roman mint and the last section of the obverse [29] legend is always completed to the right of the bust of the portrait. In contrast to the Antiochene mint, whose right to issue imperial coins was revoked by Septimius as punishment for Antiochia’s support to Pescennius [30] Niger , the Alexandrian mint remained in charge of striking imperial types [31] for Septimius and his family, and that until 196 ad. It is likely that tempo- rary circumstances required that Alexandria continue issuing imperial coins. A﬇er Septimius Severus defeated his opponent Pescennius Niger at the battle of , Septimius le﬇ for Rome. Most likely the emperor, being physically absent in Egypt, needed to secure the support of the Roman legions based in Egypt, and therefore, let the Alexandrian mint produce imperial aurei and [32] denarii for the soldier’s stipendia and prospective donatives. Now that Alexandia is named as the potential mint which issued consecratio [33] type 1, its issue date can be examined. Remarkably, the obverse legend of the consecratio type recaptures the nomenclature which Commodus bore early [34] in his reign: IM COMM ANTON AVG PIVS RBIT (sic) , whereas the re- verse legend CONSECRATIO and the depiction of the eagle strongly suggest [35] that the specimens were actually issued posthumously. Around the spring of 195 ad, Septimius Severus retrospectively adopted himself as the son of , which is confirmed by several ancient literary accounts, honorary

______[29] Appendix 6, fig. 29 and 30; ric iv.a, p. 56-58; bmcre v, pp. cxviii and cxxii. [30] McAlee 2007, p. 262 and Downey 1961, p. 239-241. [31] ric iv·a, p. 56-57; Bland, Bendall & Burnett 1987, p. 65-83; Bickford-Smith 1994/ 95, p. 54-57. Cf. Savio 1985, p. 137 demonstrated too that Septimius issued denarii at the Alexandrian mint, but argued that these coins were meant for circulation outside Egypt and Christiansen 1988, pp. 296-297 and 301 stated that Septimius issued denarii for his public expenditure, possibly as a by-product of the scarce number of provincial coins being struck at Alexandria. [32] Before, in the first and second century, the Alexandrian mint had been active issuing a few series of imperial coins during the early reign of , most likely, also for his eastern military campaigns and their a﬇ermath. See Metcalf 1982, p. 323-324 and Carson 1990, p. 274. [33] Unfortunately the Festschri﬇ for Alexandrian-born scholar Soheir Bakhoum on the Alexandrian mint does not include any discussion of it during the second century: Gerin, Geissen & Amandry 2008. [34] Commodus received the title of Britannicus in the second half of 184 ad. ﬈e obverses with this legend, issued in Rome around 184 ad, are definitely different from our exam- ined consecratio types, so we can reﬔte any suggestion that the Roman obverse dies were reused. [35] In the consecration performance, an eagle flew from the ﬔneral pyre towards the sky which symbolically had to represent the elevation of the soul of the emperor. For more see Gradel 2002. 214 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

[36] inscriptions and coin legends. Around the same time, Commodus was deified by the Senate, which made Septimius Severus brother to divus Commo- dus. Several ancient literary sources and honorary inscriptions confirm Com- [37] modus’ divine status. Consequently, the type seems to have been issued to commemorate his deification in 195 ad, a suggestion that is lent persuasion by the fact that all assembled specimens had a 6 o’clock (Ò) die axis. In his un- published corpus about the Alexandrian denarii, Bickford-Smith noticed that the imperial coin output of the Alexandrian mint in 194 ad mainly had an up- right die axis (Ì), whereas the specimens of 195 ad all had a reverted die axis [38] (Ò). Most likely, therefore, the emission of the consecratio type for Commo- dus can be linked to Septimius’ retrospective adoption into the Antonine House, which is generally dated to the first half of 195 ad. However, as noticed before, the obverse legend bears no divus legend, but recaptures a nomenclature Commodus bore during his lifetime, suggesting that [39] the type was issued before Commodus’ deification. Die links with a peculiar silver type for Commodus, however, which recently appeared in trade, suggest [40] that the obverses of the consecratio type were struck by reused dies. ﬈is rare silver emission was probably issued by the Alexandrian mint during Com-

______[36] Dio 76.7.4; ha, Vita Severi 10.6, 11.4; Aurelius Victor, Liber de Caesaribus 20.30; bmcre v, p. xci; ric iv·a Septimius Severus 65-66, 686, 700-702a, 712. Although Dio’s text sug- gests that the posthumous self-adoption of Septimius Severus and the deification of Commodus happened a﬇er the defeat of Clodius Albinus in 197 ad, most scholars agree that those facts happened around the spring of 195 ad. Cf. Baharal 1996, p. 21; Hekster 2002, p. 189-191; Kienast 2004, pp. 148 and 156. We must note the article of Lovotti 1998, p. 221-227, in which she suggests that Commodus was unofficially deifi- cated in 195 ad, but that it was not officially recognized until 197 ad. [37] ae 1951 75 = cil viii 27374; cil viii 1333, 5699, 5700, 9317, 23707; ils 420, 422, 431; irt 389, 393. No divi Commodi frater coin types are known. Previously, Commodus had been condemned by the Senate to a damnatio memoriae: Dio 74.2.1. Birley 1999, pp. 184-188, 198-199. For more about Septimius Severus’ claim to be the brother of the divine Commodus, see Merkelback 1979, p. 189-190; Rubin 1980, p. 212-214; Baharal 1996, p. 21-22; Hekster 2002, p. 189-191 and references; von Saldern 2003, p. 144-145. [38] ﬈e reference to Bickford-Smith’s unpublished monograph about the Alexandrian denarii of 193-195 ad, finished in July 1993, was mentioned to me by Dr. Curtis Clay. ﬈e die axis of the other eastern Severan mints in this period are not known to me. [39] Commodus received the title of Britannicus in the second half of 184 ad, and from 185 ad onwards the title Felix was added to Commodus’ nomenclature; see Kaiser-Raiss 1980, pp. 27-28 and 57-58; Hekster 2002, p. 93-95. [40] See appendix 1-3 for die links. ﬈e references to the specimens of the silver type are : Type from private collection of Mr. Doug Smith from the Michael Kelly Collection (Spink, 18/ix/1997, lot 1052); Forum Ancient Coins no. 33842; Forum Ancient Coins no. 14688; http://www.beastcoins.com from the Michael Kelly Collection, March 2008; Fitzwilliam Museum : cm.204-2005 (donated by Henri Delger (17/iii/2005) no. 97456); British Museum, collected by Roger Bickford-Smith : rab-s coll. no. 454. liesbeth claes 215

modus’ reign. ﬈e circumstances surrounding the issue are unclear, but they could have been struck in response to the alleged proposed imperial visit of Commodus to Africa as mentioned in the and suggested by some Alexandrian tetradrachms showing Commodus and a female figure per- [41] sonifying Alexandria next to each other. Furthermore, it is remarkable that the Alexandrian type of 192 ad referred to the nomenclature which Commo- dus bore around 184 ad, before the title FELIX was added to his official no- [42] menclature. ﬈is fact suggests that in 192 ad, the Alexandrian mint seems not to follow the policy concerning types of the Roman mint, which at that time issued increasingly more excessive types assimilating Commodus more and [43] more with the divine. In the appendix, seven specimens are brought together of the rare and un- published silver type mentioned before, whose reverses bear the legend LIR [44] AVG RM TR P XVII COS VII PP (sic) and display Libertas. At least three of these obverse dies, in items 1a, b and c, seem to have been reused to strike the obverses of the consecratio type. ﬈e reused obverse dies suggest that in 195 ad no priority was given to engraving new obverse dies referring to Commo- dus’ newly consecrated status. ﬈e absence of the DIVVS COMMODVS legend could have several explanations. Firstly, the specimens could have been struck at the Alexandrian mint at a time at which Commodus was not yet offi- cially deified, but expected to be so soon. Communication between the central power in Rome and mints in the provinces could sometimes fail, as other [45] emissions demonstrate , and if it is true that the Alexandrian mint had its ______[41] ha, Vita Commodi 9.1; Dattari 1901, nos. 3854-3855, plate 8. ric does not attest any coin type of Commodus from Alexandria and explicitly states that the mint of Rome is the only one issuing imperial coinage during Commodus’ reign. [42] Kaiser-Raiss 1980, pp. 27-28 and 57-58; Hekster 2002, p. 93-95. [43] About Commodus and his divine associations, see Kaiser-Raiss 1980, pp. 50 and 61- 63; Hekster 2001, p. 51-83 y 2002, pp. 92-136 and 186-187; von Saldern 2003, p. 180-182; Meyer-Zwiffelhoffer 2006, p. 189-216. [44] ﬈rough personal communication, Mr. Doug Smith suggested to me that these Libertas types were issued a﬇er the death of Commodus, when the Alexandrian mint was not ready to declare a side in the Severus-Pescennius affair. However, it seems unlikely that a mint could independently issue imperial denarii. [45] For example, under Gaius’ reign, ’ nameless portrait on ’s first emis- sion was refigured to the portrait of divus in later emissions. bmcre i Gaius 1; Mattingly 1920, p. 37; Erhardt 1984, pp. 45 and 52-53; Wolters 1999, p. 303-304. Contra: Brilliant 1969, p. 13-17; Barrett 1989, p. 247-248. Also, at his accession, , who was in Antioch at the time, did not accept the title pater patriae, but on his first coin series minted by Rome the title was added to Hadrian’s nomenclature. ﬈e PP disappeared in the second series, minted a﬇er Hadrian’s return to Rome, suggesting that Hadrian intervened directly in the coin imagery. Carson 1990, p. 42; Wolters 1999, p. 305; Stevenson 2007, p. 129-130. Finally, ’s first two emissions, which lasted for three weeks, were both stopped at the mint of Rome, because he preferred a 216 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

own policy concerning coin types, this suggestion is even more plausible. As such, the consecration type symbolised hope that Commodus would be deified, a message that could please the new emperor Septimius as he wanted to link himself to the Antonine House. Secondly, it is possible that the Alexandrian mint masters had no resources for engraving new dies or found it more practi- cal to reuse old dies. In Christiansen’s technical study of the Severan Alexan- drian tetradrachms, dies lying idle for a year or two, waiting to be reused for a similar emission or even for an issue with another denomination, are fairly [46] common; therefore, the second explanation seems quite plausible. ﬈irdly, although more unlikely, it cannot be excluded that the emission of Commo- dus’ Libertas type and the consecratio type for Commodus could be the result of illegal sideline activities of the mint masters, using the same dies. In 2003, the numismatists Gitler and Ponting exposed in their research on the silver coinage of Septimius Severus an eastern workshop producing cast denarii, [47] which copied Septimius’ official denarii between 197 and 211 ad. It is not un- likely that there were more such ateliers. To conclude, the analysis of the consecratio type for Commodus indicates that only one type was struck to commemorate Commodus’ deification, in- stead of the three types recorded by several renowned numismatic catalogues. ﬈e obverse portrays a laureate Commodus with the legend IM COMM AN- TON AVG PIVS RBIT (sic); the reverse displays an eagle standing on a globe with the legend CONSECRATIO. Although most of these catalogues ques- tioned the authenticity of this type, the presented typological and stylistic analy- sis suggests that the type was issued by an eastern mint, most likely Alexandria. ﬈e six o’clock (Ò) die axis as well as the type’s message suggest that the conse- cratio type for Commodus was issued in 195 ad, most likely in relation to the retrospective adoption of Septimius Severus into the Antonine House. ﬈e reused obverse dies of the consecratio type still leaves some doubts about the authenticity of the type, although other specimens of the Alexandrian mint could have been struck with reused dies as well. We can nevertheless not en- tirely exclude the possibility that the reused obverse dies of Commodus for these consecratio specimens could indicate that the type is an ancient forgery. But I hope this article gives more cause to believe that the consecratio type for Commodus was genuine.

______less strong association with in his official nomenclature. ﬈e title PP was also dropped, because Trajan at first reﬔsed it. Wolters 1992, p. 281-299 y 1999, p. 306; Stevenson 2007, p. 128-129; Woytek 2010, pp. 93-97, 197-204. [46] Christiansen 1988, p. 295. [47] Gitler & Ponting 2003, p. 29-30. liesbeth claes 217

appendix – the consecratio coins for commodus

﬈e illustrated coin specimens are published by the courtesy of :

▪ the museum collections of Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris; © Trustees of the British Museum, London; Fritzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge; Hunterian Museum, University of Glasgow; the Coin Cabinet of the Royal Library of Brussels and the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna ▪ the auction houses the Ancient Auction House, Florida; Apollo Numismatics; Beast- coins.com; Bruun Rasmussen Kunstauktioner; Classical Numismatic Group (cng); Fritz Rudolf Künker GmbH & Co. KG, Osnabrück; Gorny & Mosch; Leu Numismatik AG, Zürich; Numismatica Ars Classica ▪ the numismatic online databases CoinArchivesPro; Forum Ancient Coins; Wildwinds.com ▪ the private coin collections of Mr. Rainer Blaeser and Mr. Doug Smith.

1. Description of the different varieties of the obverse and reverse types of sections 2 and 3 Obverse type varieties a1a Bust Commodus laureate, right, bearded; I M COMM ANTO–N AVG PIVS RBIT a1b Bust Commodus laureate, right, bearded; I M COMM ANTO–N AVG PIVS RBIT a1c Bust Commodus laureate, right, bearded; I M COMM ANTO–N AVG PIVS RBIT a1d Bust Commodus laureate, right, bearded; no natural neck; [I M] COMM ANTO– N AVG PIV[S RBIT]

Reverse type varieties r1a|b|c Libertas, standing, holding a pileus and a long scepter, star in the field; LIR AVG RM TR P XVII COS VII PP (192 ad) r2a Eagle with bulging eyes, long tail, wings closed, standing on a globe with two crossed circles; CON–S–E–CRATIO r2b Eagle, long neck, with long tail, wings closed, standing on a globe with two crossed circles; [CONSE] CRATIO r2c Eagle, long neck, with short tail, wings closed, standing on a globe with (two crossed circles ?); [CONSE] CRA–TI–O r2d Eagle, long neck, with short tail, wings closed, standing on a globe with two crossed circles; CON–S–E–CR–AT–I–O r2e Eagle, long neck, with short tail, wings closed, standing on globe with two crossed circles; CON–S–[E]–[C]R–AT–IO r2f Eagle, short neck, with short tail, bending his knees, wings closed, standing on a globe (with two crossed circles ?); CON–[S–E]–CRATIO (low cra﬇smen quality) r2g Eagle, short neck, with short tail, wings closed, standing on a globe (with two crossed circles ?); CON–S–E–CRATIO (low cra﬇smen quality) 218 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

2. ﬈e Alexandrian silver issue of Commodus (~192 ad)

Fig. 1: a1a|r1a – 3.24 g – 18 mm – Ì Fig. 2: a1b|r1b – 1.796 g – 18.6 mm – Ì Private collection of Doug Smith from the Michael Forum Ancient Coins 33842 Kelly Collection (Spink, 18/ix/1997, lot 1052)

Fig. 3: a1b|r1b – 2.844 g – 18.7 mm – Ì Fig. 4: a1b|r1b – 3.00 g – 18 mm – Ì Forum Ancient Coins 14688 Classical Numismatic Group (cng), E-Auction 126, lot 311

Fig. 5: a1c|r1a – 2.93 g – ? mm – Ì Fig. 6: a1d|r1c – 3.44 g – 16/18 mm – Ì http://www.beastcoins.com from the Fitzwilliam Museum: cm.204-2005 (donated Michael Kelly Collection, March 2008 by Henri Delger (17/iii/2005) no. 97456 – © ﬈e Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, uk)

Fig. 7: a1d|r1b – 3.14 g – 17 mm – Ì British Museum: collected by Roger Bickford-Smith, rab-s coll. no. 454 (© Trustees of the British Museum)

3. ﬈e consecratio coins for Commodus (~195 ad)

Fig. 8: a1a|r2a – 2.49 g – 16/17 mm – ? Fig. 9: a1a|r2a – 3.03 g – 18.2 mm – ? cng 61 (25/ix/2002), lot 1828 from the Marc Melcher Apollo Numismatics; VCoins 2006 Collection, placed on wildwinds.com/Commodus liesbeth claes 219

Fig. 10 : a1a|r2a – ? g – ? mm – ? Fig. 11 : a1a|r2b – 2.69 g – 17/18 mm – ? Ancient Auction House, Florida through Ebay, cng 66 (19/v/2004), lot 1522 placed on wildwinds.com/Aurelius 274 (wrong identification)

Fig. 12 : a1b/d?|r2b – 2.77 g – 18 mm – Ò Fig. 13 : a1a|r2c – 2.60 g – 17.0 mm – Ó Fitzwilliam Museum: cm.205-2005 (donated by Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Inv.-No. Henri Delger (17/iii/2005) no. 18662 – rö 40.615 (donated by Georg Elmer in 1928) © ﬈e Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, uk)

Fig. 14 : a1a|r2d – 2.67 g – 16/17 mm – ? Fig. 15 : a1c|r2d – 3.18 g – 16/17 mm – ? cng 64 (24/ix/2003), lot 1120 cng 60 (22/v/2002), lot 1730

Fig. 16 : a1c|r2d – 2.59 g – 16/17 mm – ? Fig. 17 : a1c|r2d – 2.16 g – ? mm – ? cng 70 (21/ix/2005), lot 1038 Gorny & Mosch 170 (13/x/2008), n 2381 = Gorny & Mosch 181 (12/x/2009), n 2254

Fig. 18 : a1a|r2e – 2.64 g – 17 mm – Ò Fig. 19 : a1b|r2e – 2.63 g – 16/17 mm – ? Private collection of Rainer Blaeser from Ebay: Bruun Rasmussen Kunstauktioner, Auction 782 ‘Numismatik Lanz, Munich’, 2010 (11/xii/2007), lot 5394 = Fritz Rudolf Künker GmbH & Co. kg, Osnabrück: Auction 143 (6/x/2008), lot 599 = Gorny & Mosch 164 (17/iii/2008), n 413

Fig. 20 : a1b|r2f – 2.79 g – 16.8/18.2 mm – Ò Fig. 21 : a1a|r2g – 3.013 g – 19 mm – Ò Bibliothèque nationale de France fg 5944 British Museum 756, Coins&Medals: bnk, r.618 (© Trustees of the British Museum) 220 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

Fig. 22 : a1a|r2g – 2.74 g – 18 mm – Ò Fig. 23 : a1a|r2g – 2.53 g – 18 mm – Ò Numismatica Ars Classica (nac) ag, Auction 42 hcc 28002; Robertson ii Commodus 69 (20/xi/2007), n 360 From the Barry Feirstein Collection Part iii (Privately purchased from Harlan J. Berk)

4. Plot chart of masses of consecratio specimens

Mass range (in g) Number of coin types Specimens (= r2|…) [2.10 – 2.20[ 1 d [2.20 – 2.30[ [2.30 – 2.40[ [2.40 – 2.50[ 1 a [2.50 – 2.60[ 1 2 3 c d g [2.60 – 2.70[ 1 2 3 4 b d e e [2.70 – 2.80[ 1 2 3 b f g [2.80 – 2.90[ [2.90 – 3.00[ [3.00 – 3.10[ 1 2 a f [3.10 – 3.20[ 1 d

5. Bronze specimen of the provincial mint of Alexandria (193/194 ad)

Fig. 24 : 9.74 g – 30 mm – Ì a AVTK&CE!TCE OYHPOC!EPTCEB, laureate head of Septimius Severus right r Β, Nike with chiton walking, holding palm branch Savio (1997) no. 1623 ≈ Dattari 4012 (ÆS) = Vogt ii.116 = Christiansen, Coins i, 284

liesbeth claes 221

6. Coin specimens issued by eastern mints (194-196 ad)

Fig. 25 : 6.65 g – ? mm – Í (Alexandria) Fig. 26 : 3.69 g – 20 mm – Ì (Antioch) a IMP CAES PESC NICER IVSTVS AVG, laureate, a IMP CAES C PESC NIGER IVS AVG COS II, draped and cuirassed hear of Pescennius Niger right laureate head of Pescennius Niger right r VICORIAE AVG PP, Draped female standing, r BONAE SPEI, Spes advancing le﬇, holding long staff and figure of Victoria holding flower Leu Numismatik ag, Zürich, Auction 87 cng, E-auction 202, lot 335 (White (6/v/2003), lot 47. ric – Mountain Collection). ric iv 3d

Fig. 27 : 3.21 g – 18 mm – Ì (Caesarea Fig. 28 : 2.98 g – 18 mm – Ì (Alexandria) in Cappadocia) a IMP CAE L SEP SEV PERT AVG, laureate a IMP CAES C PESC NIGER IVST AVG, laureate head of Septimius Severus right head of Pescennius Niger, cuirassed, right r ET IA II, female figure seated le﬇, r SALVTI AVGVSTI, Salus standing, carrying a holding palladium and sceptre snake and holding a patera cng, E-auction 248, lot 367. ric iv 348 Coin Cabinet, Brussels ii·59575. ric –

Fig. 29 : 3.252 g – 17.4 mm – Ò (Emessa) Fig. 30 : 3.145 g – 18.4 mm – Ò a IMP CAE L SEP SE-V PERT AVG COS II, (Laodicea ad Mare) laureate head of Septimius Severus right a L SEPT SEV PERT AVG IMP VIII, r INVICTO IMP, trophy and arms laureate head of Septimius Severus right Forum Ancient Coins 15154. ric iv 389 r FORT REDVC, Fortuna standing le﬇ holding cornucopia in each hand Forum Ancient Coins 28923. ric iv 477a

7. ﬈e following museum collections had no consecratio specimens for Com- modus

﬈e Ashmolean Museum, University of Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna; Oxford, UK Collezione Numismatica, Bologna, Italy Manchester Museum, University of Man- Colección de Monedas Santander, Madrid, chester, UK Spain Münzkabinett, Berlin, Germany Geldmuseum, Utrecht, the Netherlands Historisches Museum, Bern, Switzerland Penningkabinet, Koninklijke Bibliotheek Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Münz- van België/Coin Cabinet, Royal Library kabinett, Dresden, Germany of Belgium, Brussels, Belgium 222 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

Knester Museum, Hannover, Germany American Numismatic Society, New York, Kunstgeschichtliches Museum, Osnabrück, USA Germany Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University Gabinet Monet i Medali, Warsaw, Poland of Ann Arbor, USA Royal Collection of Coins and Medals, ﬈e Ottillia Buerger Collection of Ancient Danish National Museum, Copenhagen, and Byzantine Coins, Lawrence Univer- Denmark sity, Appleton, Wisconsin, USA Universitetes Myntkabinett, Oslo, Norway Princeton University, Princeton, USA Il Gabinetto Numismatico dei Civici Musei, Australian Centre for Ancient Numismatic Udine, Italy Studies, Gale Collection, Sydney, Australia

bibliography

Alston 1994 = R. Alston, Roman military pay from Caesar to , jrs 84, p. 113-123. Baharal 1996 = D. Baharal, Victory of Propaganda : ﬈e dynastic aspect of the imperial propaganda of the Severi. ﬈e literary and archaeological evidence ad 193-235, Oxford. Barrett 1989 = A.A. Barrett, . ﬈e Corruption of Power, Londen y New York. Bickford-Smith 1994/95 = R.A. Bickford-Smith, ﬈e Imperial Mints in the East for Septimius Severus: It is time to begin a thorough reconsideration, rin 96, p. 53-71. Birley 1999 = A.R. Birley, Septimius Severus : ﬈e African Emperor, London. Bland, Bendall & Burnett 1987 = R. Bland, S. Bendall & A.M. Burnett, ﬈e Mints of Pescennius Niger in the light of some new aurei, nc 147, p. 65-83. Brilliant 1969 = R. Brilliant, An Early Imperial Portrait of Caligula, aaah 4, p. 13-17. Butcher 2004 = K. Butcher, Coinage in . Nothern Syria 64 bc-ad 253, Lon- don. Carson 1990 = R.A.G. Carson, Coins of the Roman Empire, London y New York. Christiansen 1988 = E. Christiansen, ﬈e Roman Coins of Alexandria, 2 vols., Aarhus. Crawford 1975 = M. Crawford, Finance, Coinage and Money, anrw ii 2, p. 562-565. Dattari 1901 = G. Dattari, Numi Augg. Alexandrini, Catalogo della Collezione G. Dattari, 2 vols., Cairo. Downey 1961 = G. Downey, A History of Antioch in Syria from Seleucus to the Arab Con- quest, Princeton. Dutilh 1898 = E.D.J. Dutilh, Études Alexandrines, jian 1, p. 433-442. Erhardt 1984 = C. Erhardt, Roman Coin Types and the Roman Public, Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 39, p. 41-54. Gerin, Geissen & Amandry 2008 = D. Gerin, A. Geissen & M. Amandry, Aegyptiaca serta in Soheir Bakhoum memoriam : mélanges de numismatique, d’iconographie et d’histoire (Collezioni numismatiche 7), Milano. liesbeth claes 223

Gitler & Ponting 2003 = H. Gitler & M. Ponting, ﬈e Silver Coinage of Septimius Seve- rus and His Family, 193-211 ad : A Study of the Chemical Composition of the Roman and Eastern Issues, Milano (Galux 16). Gradel 2002 = I. Gradel, Emperor worship and Roman religion, Oxford. Hasebroek 1921 = J. Hasebroek, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Kaisers Septimius Severus, Heidelberg. Hekster 2001 = O.J. Hekster, Commodus-Hercules. ﬈e People’s princeps, sci 20, p. 51-83. Hekster 2002 = O.J. Hekster, Commodus. An Emperor at the Crossroads, Amsterdam. Hill 1964 = P.V. Hill, ﬈e coinage of Septimius Severus and his family of the mint of Rome, ad 193-217, London. Kaiser-Raiss 1980 = M.R. Kaiser-Raiss, Die stadtrömische Münzprägung während der Alleinherrscha﬇ des Commodus. Untersuchungen zur Selbstdarstellung eines römischen Kaisers, Frankﬔrt am Main. Katsari 2003 = C. Katsari, ﬈e Organisation of the Roman Mints During the ﬈ird Cen- tury ce : the View from the Eastern Provinces, Classics Ireland 10, p. 27-47. Kienast 2004 = D. Kienast, Römische Kaisertabelle : Grundzüge einer römischen Kaiser- chronologie, Darmstadt. Laffranchi 1921 = L. Laffranchi, L’xi anno imperatoria di Constantino Magno, Com- municazione alla Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 1. Lichtenberger 2011 = A. Lichtenberger, Severus Pius Augustus. Studien zur sakralen Repräsentation und Rezeption der Herrscha﬇ des Septimius Severus und seiner Familie (193-211 n.Chr.) (Impact of Empire 14), Leiden y Boston. Lovotti 1998 = F. Lovotti, Per un aricchimento della documentazione originaria della genealogia ‘Antonina’ di Settimio Severo, rsa 28, p. 221-227. Mabbott 1946 = T.O. Mabbott, On the Coinage of Pescennius Niger, nr 3, p. 145-150. Mattingly 1920 = H. Mattingly, Some Historical Roman Coins of the First Century ad, jrs 10, p. 37. Mattingly 1932 = H. Mattingly, ﬈e Coinage of Septimius Severus and his times. Mints and Chronology, nc 12, p. 177-198. McAlee 2007 = R. McAlee, ﬈e Coins of Roman Antioch, Lancaster. Merkelback 1979 = R. Merkelback, Ephesische Parerga 25 : Commodus als Bruder des Septimius Severus, zpe 33, p. 189-190. Metcalf 1982 = W.E. Metcalf, ﬈e Flavians in the East, in T. Hackens & R. Weiller (eds.), Proceedings of the 9 International Congress of Numismatics, Berne, September 1979, Louvain-la-Neuve y Luxembourg, p. 321-339. Meyer-Zwiffelhoffer 2006 = E. Meyer-Zwiffelhoffer, Ein Visionär auf dem ﬈ron ? Kaiser Commodus, Hercules Romanus, Klio 88, p. 189-216. Milne 1938 = J.G. Milne, Review of H. Mattingly & E.A. Sydenham, ﬈e Roman Imperial Coinage, Vol. iv, part i: to . London, Spink & Son, 1936, jrs 28, p. 96-98. Nelson 1982 = C.A. Nelson, Pescennius Niger : A ﬈ird Year, zpe 49, p. 265-274. Pink 1933 = K. Pink, Der Au﬋au der Römischen Münzpragung in der Kaiserzeit. i, Die Zeit des Septimius Severus, Numismatische Zeitschri﬇ 66, p. 17-54. Rowan 2012 = C. Rowan, Under Divine Auspices : Divine Ideology and the Visualisation of Power in the Severan Period, Cambridge, forthcoming. 224 the consecratio coins for commodus – a reconsideration

Rubin 1980 = Z. Rubin, Civil War Propaganda and Historiography, Brussel. von Saldern 2003 = F. von Saldern, Studien zur Politik des Commodus, Würzburg. Savio 1985 = A. Savio, Sui Denari di Settimio Severo emessi dalla zecca di Alessandria, acme 38, p. 137-143. Savio 1997 = A. Savio, Katalog der alexandrinischen Münzen der Sammlung Dr. Christian Friedrich August Schledehaus im Kulturgeschichtlichen Museum Osnabrück. Band 3 : Die Münzen des 3. Jahrhunderts (Septimius Severus - Domitius Domitianus). Bramsche (Osnabrücker Kulturdenkmäler Band 7). Stevenson 2007 = T. Stevenson, Roman Coins and Reﬔsals of the Title pater patriae, nc 167, p. 119-141. Szaivert 1989 = W. Szaivert, Die Münzprägung der Kaiser Marcus Aurelius, und Commodus (161/162), Wien. Turcan 1998 = R. Turcan, Le culte impérial, anwr ii.16.2, col. 1004-1005. van Heesch 1978 = J. van Heesch, Les ateliers monétaires de Pescennius Niger, rbn cxxiv, p. 58-71. van Heesch 2000 = J. van Heesch, Mints and the Roman Army from Augustus to Dio- cletian, in P.W. M. Freeman, J. Bennett, Z.T. Fiema & B. Hofmann (eds.), Proceed- ings of the xviiith International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies. Limes xviii, Am- man, Jordan, 2000, Oxford, (British Archaeological Reports International Series vol. 1084), p. 35-42. Wolters 1992 = R. Wolters, Der Au﬋au der Prägungen in den Ersten Regierungsjahren des Traianus, Litterae Numismaticae Vindobonenses 4, p. 281-299. Wolters 1999 = R. Wolters, Nummi signati. Untersuchugen zur römischen Münzprägung und Geldwirtscha﬇, München. Woytek 2010 = B. Woytek, Die Reichsprägung des Kaisers Traianus (98-117), New York. Zedelius 1977 = V. Zedelius, Untersuchungen zur Münzprägung von Pertinax bis Clodius Albinus, Münster (diss.).